From Survey To Server

When you look at the shape of most media plans, they all look remarkably similar. This is largely because media choice is led by what data are most available. And by what data planners are most comfortable with.

But there is a fundamental change taking place with regard to 'media' data, in line with the changes taking place as a result of the new digital world. The sort of data we are most comfortable with as planners and strategists are gold standard media currencies. These are long established, committee led, peer-reviewed, stable (mostly), trusted sources. I'm talking BARB (TV), RAJAR (radio), NRS (print), and so on. You can also include TGI in this as it has almost become a currency in itself.

Whether they are accurate or not is another point. And to be honest it doesn't really matter that much. It's more important that they are stable, to allow trading to take place. When you lift the lid on some of these they are in fact creaking under the strain and almost quaint in the way they measure media. However, measuring media is a huge challenge and they are the best we've got (I wouldn't knock things like BARB, they are very professionally run).

However, the internet and mobile can offer a different type of data. Instead of measuring them via surveys, we are starting to see data emerge that is closer to a census, in other words just counting what happens. There has always been a discrepancy between web measurement surveys (ie Comscore, Nielsen) and server data. But these issues (around things like cookie deletion) are slowly being resolved so the two are starting to align. Comscore is now integrating the two with their web measurement and their mobile measurement is purely server based.

Of course the downside of moving from measuring the person to measuring the device is that you don't know much about the individual, or at least you have to make an educated guess.

The other problem with server data is that there is too much of it. It's bottom up, not top down. You get everything, when in fact you only want some simple metrics. And that is the stage where we are now. The data are there, but no-one has yet figured out a way to make sense of it. Interestingly, this also happened with cable TV in the UK. Everyone thought that measurement would be simple using set top box data. I remember a project with Videotron to try to make sense of their set top box data. It was killed-off as unworkable as there was too much data in too many different places. Looking back this should have come as no surprise - they couldn't even issue their customers with correct bills.

So we need to bring in some different skills to reduce this mass of data to something that a planner can use alongside the other media data they already know so well. Comparable metrics that allow a mobile app to be judged alongside a full page ad in The Times. Traditional research companies with skills in sampling and survey design might not have the ability to do this. On the other hand the tech guys don't understand what metrics are needed. Some hybrid of the two is going to be required. A sort of techy researcher - a genuine nerd.

The 'TV Is Dead' Argument is Dead

Data from Nielsen on US TV viewing puts the nail in the coffin of the TV is dying argument. Viewing in the US is up 20% in the last ten years and now stands at an all time high. Given the growth of web usage, games playing and the perceived decline in quality, how many people in 1999 would have predicted that?

Americans now spend a staggering four hours and 49 minutes a day watching the box. And this pattern is being repeated in other markets. Looking at the change in individuals viewing over the last 5 years France is up 6%, Spain up 11%, India up 7%, Brazil up 5%.

So what are the drivers? It could be the growth in choice, although households with lots of channels don’t necessarily watch more than those with a few. And as Barry Schwartz pointed out just because you can buy twenty flavours of jam doesn’t mean you eat more jam. More likely it’s the introduction of new technology such as PVRs. Most of us thought that giving viewers the power to schedule their own TV would mean that they were more selective in their viewing and therefore the amount of time they spent watching was more likely to decline than increase. We were wrong. People are now squeezing more value out of their TV’s, both in terms of content and the quality of the experience. And it will only continue with the growth of HD and then 3D.

And these viewing numbers don’t even take into account the use of new platforms such as mobile and online. Compared to viewing on a TV screen these are still tiny, but they are only going to grow as smartphone penetration increases, broadband speeds get faster and wireless technology takes hold.

So, the world loves TV more than ever.

And yet the channels are in such a pickle commercially. It’s clear now that they should have been investing all along in what people love about TV (the programmes, the talent, the shared experiences), rather than finding new and exotic ways to deliver them to people.